MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000699857 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjz203.000

OP01 Higher vs. standard adalimumab maintenance regimens in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: Results from the SERENE-UC maintenance study

2020· article· en· W3000699857 on OpenAlexaff
J F Colombel, Julián Panés, Geert D’Haens, Stefan Schreiber, Remo Panaccione, Laurent Peyrin‐Biroulet, Edward V. Loftus, Silvio Danese, Édouard Louis, Alessandro Armuzzi, Marc Ferrante, Harald Vogelsang, J Lefèbvre, Thao Doan, Wenhui Xie, B Huang, J Petersson, Jasmina Kalabic, Anne Robinson, William J. Sandborn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisDosingInternal medicineRegimenAdverse effectAdalimumabClinical endpointMaintenance therapyClinical trialChemotherapyTumor necrosis factor alpha

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Adalimumab (ADA) is efficacious and well tolerated in adult patients with ulcerative colitis (UC).1,2 SERENE-UC (NCT02065622) is a study evaluating higher ADA dosing regimens from which induction study results have previously been reported3; here, we report data from the maintenance study. Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, randomised, multicentre study evaluated higher vs. standard ADA dosing regimens for induction and maintenance therapy in adult patients with moderately to severely active UC. Following completion of the induction study at Week 8, all patients were re-randomised 2:2:1 to ADA 40 mg every week (40 EW), ADA 40 mg every other week (40 EOW), or exploratory ADA 40 mg with therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) regimens, stratified by induction treatment regimen, clinical response status at Week 8, and clinical remission (CRem) status at Week 8 among Week 8 responders. Efficacy endpoints were evaluated in Week 8 responders (ITT-RP) unless indicated differently. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients achieving CRem (full Mayo Score ≤2 with no subscore >1) at Week 52. The endoscopic component of the Mayo Score was scored via central reading. Non-responder imputation was used for missing values. Comparisons between 40 EW and 40 EOW dosing regimens used the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test adjusted for stratification. Safety assessment included a collection of adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and laboratory data. Results Of 852 patients in the Global (ex-Japan) induction study, 757 were re-randomised at Week 8 and 371 were included in the ITT-RP. In the ITT-RP, induction baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally balanced across the 3 treatment arms; range across arms for mean UC disease duration was 6.2–7.8 years, 6.8–11.7% had prior infliximab use, and 62.5–63.5% were receiving corticosteroids. The overall mean ADA exposure was 252.2 days. The table displays results for efficacy endpoints. The observed safety profile was similar between maintenance treatment arms, including AEs of special interest (generally <1% across arms). Conclusion In the Global (ex-Japan) study of SERENE-UC, CRem at Week 52 was numerically higher among Week 8 responders in patients receiving ADA 40 EW compared with 40 EOW maintenance regimens (∆ = 10.5%), but not statistically significant. Higher maintenance treatment with 40 EW was generally safe and well tolerated with a similar safety profile to 40 EOW. No new long-term safety concerns were observed. References

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207